October 6, 2012

Here, the PBS Newshour interviewed Mark Shields and David Brooks doddering through an effort to say something intelligent on the subject:

Surely, you can do better than that! Or do they deserve more credit for working hard to come up with something other than the obvious: that Paul Ryan will crush — to use the word Paul Ryan used to describe what Romney did to Obama — Joe Biden?

How could Paul Ryan do anything other than win decisively? By seeming too strong and making us feel sorry for Biden? Look at how Brooks and Shields devolve into blabbing about what a nice person Biden is and how much they like the guy. Shields goes on about Biden's first wife dying, Biden commuting by train between Washington and Wilmington, Delaware to take care of his kids, and Biden giving a Christmas party every year for the Amtrak workers. And then Brooks effuses about a photo he has of his son getting chased around by Biden with a super-soaker water cannon... tee hee hee hee. "So he's a nice, relaxed guy. I'm not sure Paul Ryan... maybe bow hunting on the lawn there" tee hee hee hee "It would be more perilous." And then Shields says "Is bow hunting covered by the Second Amendment?" and Brooks looks at Shields and laughs and laughs.

Ah, liked the tone of this post a lot. That is exactly what they cry for, ridicule, esp. the sellout Brooks. Now why can't you do the same with Obama instead of the deferential President stuff,or the loving boyfriendy stuff, or the nurturing sympathetic motherly stuff. Somehow cruel neutrality stops short of Obama.

Biden has prospered in the shark cage for over 30 years for a reason. Many reasons actually. Some have to do with an amiable personality and his willingness to cultivate relationships with people at all levels. (Contrast Kerry and Gore.) But he's not the total dunce that people make him out to be. He's shrewd and, as Obama might say, "smart enough." It's going to be Wonker against Zonker. Who wins?

The last VP debate between Biden and Palin was the most watched in history. I watched it. I can vaguely remember that Palin didn't screw up and Biden didn't act overbearing or condescending. It was revenue neutral for both Dems and Repubs. My guess is that this will be about the same. Biden will be affable and likeable and Ryan will be intense and likeable, and the needle will not move.

Obama campaign just released their September numbers raised over 181 million, almost a record....

WTF do republicans, conservatives not give money, they want Romney to win , they know that a Obama second term will cement America decline...

But the welfare takers and liberals are more willing to put their money to get Obama elected...what wrong with conservatives in America how is Romney going to win, when Obama has the media propagandizing for him, more money then Romney and republicans and the incumbacy he doesn't pay to fly all over the country , security for rallies, free media, and the ability to all the other dirty tricks, unemployment numbers, telling defense contractors to not tell their workers about their job loses.

Shit would you people open your wallets... Because when your taxed to shiz to pay for Obamacare and all the massive spending and debt in Obama second term with higher gas. And food and worst healthcare... They maybe you might wonder why you didn't volunteer or donate to elect Republicans.

" Biden has prospered in the shark cage for over 30 years for a reason. Many reasons actually. Some have to do with an amiable personality and his willingness to cultivate relationships with people at all levels. (Contrast Kerry and Gore.) But he's not the total dunce that people make him out to be. "

Biden lied his way through the debate with Palin and she didn't call him on it. He is a creep who promised Clarence Thomas an easy confirmation hearing, then sandbagged him with Anita Hill. Ryan won't let him get away with lies.

The highlight of the Cheney-Lieberman debate was Cheney's dry humor about returning Joe to the private sector. It was like Reagan's quip about age. Even Lieberman laughed.

Wait a sec. Brooks and Shields claimed that people expected Obama would beat Romney? Funny, didn't I hear Axelrod and other Obama representatives on last Sunday's talk shows trying to LOWER expectations for the debate by saying Romney is a very good debater, he's had more recent practice at debating than Obama has had, etc?

What happened was Obama's handlers tried -before the debate - to talk up Romney's debating skills because they thought Obama would then match or beat Romney in the debate. Had that happened, people like Shields and Brooks would have crowed that even a good debater like Romney was no match for the brilliance of The Won.

Nice try at rewriting recent history, Obama lackeys. However, some of us can remember things that occurred prior to your 24 hour spin cycle.

It'll be a toss-up as to whether Joe pulls a major gaffe and blows it big-time or whether he successfully emotes/panders and distorts/lies on policy questions enough to win the debate. The odds are actually with the latter, as no moderator is going to fact-check on the fly, and Ryan's ability to challenge any distortions will occur a) after initial damage is done, and b) limited by terms/nature of debate format. Joe will be tough to pin down--he hasn't lasted as long as he has on the national scene by accident...remember, this is the guy the Press Corps worships as an "expert" in Foreign Affairs, how do you think the press will handle the spin if the debate results appear to be a tie? Who do you think/bet will get the "push?" Won't be a cake-walk for the Elephants and Ryan AT ALL--Conservatives may laugh at Biden, but the Press Corps a) really LIKES the guy and b) actually (yes, they really, really do) thinks he is a semi-intellectual even if prone to gaffes..

Sammy, I've donated twice to Romney and will give again, although some unexpected car trouble has caused me to tighten my belt this month. I have read that donations to Romney began pouring in during the debate.

No, I don't think Ryan will be mean. He'll just be affable and deadly with the math. And he won't allow Biden to get away with lying.

He can match Biden's "I'm just a blue-collar shmoe from little old Scranton" schmaltz with "I'm just a guy from Janesville who flipped burgers at MickeyD's and drove a hot dog truck."

And of course, the Dems will be sweating thoughout the debate lest Joe lets a real howler slip out, such as a reference to Americans watching FDR on TV in 1929. I myself am praying for such a moment.

vigil, good points, and I'll bet that Ryan and Co. are not treating this like it will be a cakewalk, but I'm not sure "Ryan's ability to challenge any distortions will occur a) after initial damage is done, and b) limited by terms/nature of debate format."

Romney successfully punctured Obama's claim that Romney favors giving companies who relocate overseas tax breaks simply by saying "I've been in business for 25 years and I don't know where you got that."

I don't know the details of Biden’s career, but I am pretty sure it is based on the same thing that any other long term politician's is. He has traded government favors for votes. It is not based on smarts. I know he has been caught lying more than once, but still got re-elected.

One thing that has always bugged me about Biden is when he says "hey, man" or any other variety of ", man". He's trying to be one of the guys, cool and hip. I'll be interested in how many times he does it during their debate.

When Biden was tapped by Teh Won, he went from crazy uncle to foreign-policy specialist. At least according to my Democrat friends and acquaintances.

To the lefty media, the best score Ryan can wrestle from them will be a tie. Biden at least enjoys his job, even if he's not very good at it, so he'll be grinny and gregarious where Barry was peevish and petulant. He'll have the air of a happy prog warrior. Just that alone will secure at least a tie for Biden in the eyes of the lefty media.

I don't see as much upside for Ryan as most. Post debate 'fact-checkers' have become as questionable and dubious as poll numbers, so Ryan won't get much credit for better content than SCHMOTUS.

Let's assume these guys are in the tank for Obama and have to support Biden therefore. Let's also assume they believe it is inevitable that Biden is going to be Romney's mop.

Here is how it works. You wouldn't want people to watch the debate. So instead, you:

a) Make the winner seem inevitable, so there isn't much need to watch the debateb) Provide the sympathy vote to Biden so those who do not watch the debate have a favorable view of Biden.

It seems like these people did a great job of conspiring to help out Obama. They had their talking points all lined up, and somehow it comes of a bit natural. Of course, these comments must be aimed at the Mighty Middle voters, and the extent to which they are competent is the extent to which it reveals what the middle thinks about.

So we are borrowing money from China, to prop Shields and Brooks. When it was Shields and Gigot it was a bit better and I just noticed that Gigot did fine at his Journal editorial show today. He was going the way of Krystals and Noonans lately but today he seemed all bucked up.

Paul Ryan is another example of a subgroup that doesn't exist anymore (to continue the previous subject of under or over 40). Without googling, he's somewhere around my age, and his type was a minority, but still common when I was growing up and into my 30s. Not so anymore. Even the people who were like him at one point have changed.

@tacotaco, Here are the issues I'd expect pre-debate commentary to focus on: the issues most likely to be discussed, each debater's previously expressed views on those topics, the strengths of each debater's likely positions and the vulnerabilities of those positions, each debater's degree of knowledge of and interest in those topics, and each debater's previously demonstrated ability in formats such as the VP debate will use.

Saying that very little of the Brooks/Shields commentary addressed those points is a long way from complaining that they didn't fellate Ryan.

Senator For Life Biden will try to shape the debate as the "Champion of the Workingman" - is usual schtick since he married a very wealthy wife, left law school.

Joe says he is in tune because he is just a regular old Joe just like all the other ordinary working folk people he meets going home from the Senate Chamber in the Capital each weekend for the last 40 years.

My guess is that is what Biden will try to do at the debate. His tested old "common man schtick".

Demagogue he and regular Joe Obama are men of the People from humble roots - while Romney is a heartless plutocrat and Ryan wants to throw Granny and ObamaPhone Momma off a cliff.

Ryan's best counter is that Biden can talk all he wants about "feeling the pain" of middle class Americans - but that he and Obama have done little to fix that pain. Throw out a couple facts like gas prices Obama wanted to jack up - then go positive that Ryan and Romney will set about correcting what Biden admits. That the middle class has been buried 4 years under Obama. And borrowing from China to pay off a few connected Democrat union's middle class members is not the same as helping the whole middle class.

And push back on the idea that Senator For Life Biden and "Perfessor" Obama have any basis to say they understand working Amercans better than a man that has led businesses or a man that held many regular jobs before getting to Congress. And that both Ryan and Romney have a far better record of hiving to charity for all the "regular Joes in need" Biden has met, than Biden himself has.

Joe's been in the shark tank for 30 years because of the schmucks that come out of their holes to vote for him every six years, then go back to their routines.

If his handlers can keep him sober enough that he doesn't visibly weave out to the podium, every time he opens his mouth will be an opportunity for an own goal, and all Ryan has to do is stay on subject and correct any blatant lies. In a nice way, of course...

Brooks grossing me out, has there ever been more of a sell out..... Oh poor Biden , as if everyone doesn't have some tradgy in their life, Paul Ryan found his father dead at the age of 16 , doesn't have a house in Washington , sleeps on his sister - in laws couch in Maryland if he has to stay in the city , but try's to fly home every weekend

And everyone in his party or the opposition has said Paul Ryan is a decent , honest person who has never spoken bad of anyone, even though he's has been in politices the last 14 years but these two reduce him to some animal killer... Just watch Biden in the Bork hearings and everything these 2 hacks said would be proven false.

The same Biden that has given .05 % of his money to charity in the last ten years, and he isn't poor, Biden's worth his over 10 million, and after watching this video, people are left with the impression Biden spends every weekend with the poor but if the media can't call republicans dumb , then there evil or mean... While democrats are always ( Obama) smart with good intentions (who gives a shit about the actual results) or (Biden) just people with good intentions.

I don't care how nice a guy Joe Biden is, or is claimed to be, bu those guys. I care how he does as Veep, and to whom he's Veep. I find both of them incompetent. Brooks and Shields, too, Brooke Shields, different story.

I think it was Alan King dishing on Eisenhower by saying "Everyone says he's a nice man. Yeah, my dry cleaner guy is a nice guy but I don't want him running the country" That sums up Slow Joe for me. Make in a greeter for Walmart if you want, just get him the fuck out of office, crimeny.

Ryan should debate Biden the same way Romney did.... Biden and Obama don't talk facts they talk stories and what they say they did then what is reality

So everytime Obama went on a 3 minute ( he always spoke longer then the 2 mintues) spiel about what greatness is Obamcare or the Stimuls or his class warfare about oil companies or Trump... Romney rebutted with the facts

And that's what Ryan has to do rebut with the facts, like one of the punts said Obama went there to have a conversation ( because he can only win by emotion, Ronney will kill your through gramma on the street and lay off every teacher) , and Romney went with a chain saw ... to cut threw all the bullshit , Ryan has to do cut threw the bullshit.

And now that Obama as raised so much money in September , even more money to put bullshit ads up , he was already spending 3 to 1 more on ads in battle ground states and this will make it 4 to 1... Hopefully Obama doesn't buy another election.

Shit, you would think a guy who has the whole media on his side wouldn't be nickel and dimeing evey corner of the world for more money, but when you have to convince people of a false narrative you need 3 to 1 spending advantage and the media in your pocket.

It occurred to me just now that while the country knows Biden, many people have just started paying attention to the campaign, and they don't know Ryan. Just as the Obama campaign has tried to paint Romney as an unfeeling plutocrat - an impression blown away by the first debate - so too have they portrayed Ryan as a cold Randian, ready to push grandma off the cliff. That impression will fall like a house of cards when Ryan shows up being Ryan - wonky, but pleasant, the midwestern Boy Next Door.

Joe has to prove he's not clueless. Ryan has to prove he's not heartless.

It occurred to me just now that while the country knows Biden, many people have just started paying attention to the campaign, and they don't know Ryan. Just as the Obama campaign has tried to paint Romney as an unfeeling plutocrat - an impression blown away by the first debate - so too have they portrayed Ryan as a cold Randian, ready to push grandma off the cliff. That impression will fall like a house of cards when Ryan shows up being Ryan - wonky, but pleasant, the midwestern Boy Next Door.

Joe has to prove he's not clueless. Ryan has to prove he's not heartless.

For R/R, this debate isn't really about defeating or out-debating Biden. (In strictly substantive terms, that shouldn't be too hard for Ryan.)

It's more about the American people (especially those little acquainted with Ryan) getting a good look at Ryan-- at who Ryan actually is (as opposed to how he's been depicted or caricatured by the Obama campaign & MSM).

It'll be a toss-up as to whether Joe pulls a major gaffe and blows it big-time or whether he successfully emotes/panders and distorts/lies on policy questions enough to win the debate. The odds are actually with the latter, as no moderator is going to fact-check on the fly, and Ryan's ability to challenge any distortions will occur a) after initial damage is done, and b) limited by terms/nature of debate format.

If you will remember back to the Biden/Palin debates, the MSM declared Biden the winner immediately afterwards, based on all of his facts and her unfacts. It was only the next day, after both had been extensively fact checked that it was realized that half of what Biden said was made up, and the stuff that Palin was being called on, right after the debates, was more questionable than false.

I wouldn't call Biden a glib lier, as much as a glib story teller. He may be senile enough that he doesn't know that many of those facts that he throws out range from just not true to downright fabrications.

So, I expect some of the same here. Biden will sound intelligent and knowledgeable at the time, while being very affable. And, a lot of the people watching the debate will never see the fact checking the next day of his points, and that much of what he sounded so intelligent and knowledgeable saying was pure BS.

So, I would not be the least bit surprised if Biden (and therefore Obama) is the one who ends up "winning" the VP debates in the long run.